‘Common But Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the National Courts: Lessons fromUrgendav.The Netherlands

Abstract

The landmark 2015 decision by the Hague District Court inUrgendav.The Netherlandsrepresents the first time a national court has expressly used the international environmental law (IEL) principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities (CBDRs) of the climate regime as a complementary tool to interpret the scope of a state’s climate obligations under domestic law. This article highlights that despite the marked engagement of national courts with IEL in recent decades (including engaging with principles such as sustainable development, polluter pays, intergenerational equity, and precaution), until this decision CBDRs had remained outside the purview of environmental law jurisprudence at the national level. The article examines how the Hague Court used CBDRs to help address two common barriers to climate liability: causation and the ‘political question’ doctrine. The article argues that the Court was able to find normative content in a core element of the climate-related CBDRs: the ‘leadership’ role of developed countries in climate action. This core element has remained remarkably consensual throughout the contested history of CBDRs in the climate regime – a history that has gained a new chapter with the signature of the Paris Agreement in December 2015. The article concludes thatUrgendav.The Netherlandsmay serve as a starting point for a more productive and extensive use of CBDRs in climate litigation, provided litigants make more explicit use of the persuasive authority of the principle.

An Optimal Pollution Control Model for Environmental Protection Cooperation between Developing and Developed Countries

“…In the mid-2000s, the international community entered into a new period of controversial negotiations of global climate change policies. The Kyoto Protocol adopted the top-down climate governance structure, in which the quantitative national performance standards (the emission levels) are determined by the top management of the Agreement Organization and then the emission levels allocated to each delegate [13].…”

“…Taking the partial differentiation on λ and K 1 , we have the environmental investment of the developing country determined by the marginal efficiency of capital stock and the capital stock in the developing country. Using Equations (13) and 14, we can find that the environmental investment function in the developing country is a monotonically decreasing function of λ, but a monotonically increasing function of K 1 . Thus, as the marginal efficiency of capital increase, the environmental investment of the developing country will decrease.…”

“…As the capital stock keeps increasing, the capital return (λ) decreases in the developing country. According to Equation (13), the consumption in the developing country (C 1 ) increases continuously. At the same time, Equations (15) and (16) indicate increasing environmental investment in the developing country (E 1 ) but decreasing environmental investment in the developed country (E 2 ).…”

Domestic Courts and the Paris Agreement's Climate Goals: The Need for a Comparative Approach

“…35 However, the contributions refer only rarely to the methodological debate in international legal scholarship concerning the role of domestic courts in international law. 36 Instead, they focus on the ability of domestic courts to contribute to the global governance challenge of climate change. 37 As Elizabeth Fisher states, '[ j]udicial reasoning is of less importance than the actual bringing of the litigation and the outcome of such litigation'.…”

The Legal Protection of Forests: Ethiopian Green Legacy vs. International Environmental Regimes

“…International Environmental Law (IEL) based cooperation is key to maximize forest services and reach the intended LDN. Publicists and works of academics' advice for multilateral cooperation in management and conservation of natural resources that have transboundary impacts guided by the principles of "common but differentiated responsibilities (Ferreira, 2016)". Collaboration in regulatory measures and compliance in actions, such as forest governance, enables managing environmental challenges like climate change and greenhouse emissions (Peeters and Eliantonio, 2020).…”